Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    September 30, 2012 7:00am-7:30am PDT

7:00 am
conversation. >> the meeting of come to order. good afternoon everyone. this is the monday september 24, 2012 meeting of the land use and economic development and the san francisco board of supervisors. our clerk is elisa miller. could you give us our announcements?
7:01 am
>> please silence all audio equipment and items acted upon today will be on the next agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you. i would like to thank the staff for televising us today. we have four items on the agenda. item three we're going to continue but we intend to hear public comment for item three and could you call item one. >> yes. it's the sale of easement interest at 1407 to 1435 market street. >> and we have the director of real estate for the city. >> good afternoon chair mar, members of the committee. i am john updike with real estate and this is a summary easement
7:02 am
located southwest of jesse street. i'm going to put a map on the over head. the area is highlighted in red here. right in the center of the block. so it's just southwest of the end of jesse street, southwest of tenth street. the easement was for a sewer line that is no longer in use. planning issued and their plan and remember didded contingency and letter here and all of the squeaka motions were carried through as listed here. all of those are on file with the clerk. and the additional number recommending that the file. and this is an
7:03 am
easement done by an independent appraiser and calls for payment to the city for 77,000-dollar for the conveyance once vacated. this is a closer look at the actual easement area. and there are some physical items to be removed as part of the on going construction. the funds return to the department of jurisdiction which in this case is the sfpuc. i that commission approved the conveyance and the materials in the packet on the resolution. of course the background for the project as most likely know is the crescent heights residential development and addressed at 1407 and 1435 market street and it has mart
7:04 am
street address even though it's off jesse street. the exact location is where my pen it and it's dark. sorry about that. it's a night time shot. this is what you will currently look like under construction if you of by the site. i am electric to answer any questions. >> >> anyone from the public wish to speak? can we move this forward without recommendation? >> i believe mr. chair this is coming out of committee report tomorrow. >> with no objection move on september 25, 2012. without objection? mis miller, please call item number two. >> item two is adopting the community safety updates. >> thank you and sponsored by
7:05 am
supervisor scott wiener. >> thank you mr. chairman. today we have before us the city's community safety element which is part of our city's general plan. the community safety plan has a overawe for actions and response and recovery from a major disaster and protect san francisco with natural and human made disasters and maintain community resiliency after the disaster happens. it includes lessons learned from recent disasters like katrina and the sunamma in japan. this is the first in the general plan since this time and represents a collaboration between agencies. we focused on
7:06 am
seize mic hardards and the risk of life is from the ground failure and impact and other impacts. this includes the initiative under way and this makes sure these initiatives will continue. implementation of the community safety element will be carried out through a number of city plans including the city hazard mitigation plan and the program's developed under resilient ss initiatives. state and grant funding is contingent on having updated safety element which we currently don't have and the legislation insures that san francisco is eligible in the future. and i will turn it over here so you can hear about the process and
7:07 am
how it was developed. >> good afternoon supervisors. lily from the planning department staff. we are here today to present the safety element of the general plan. this was initiated at the a planning department and at a commission meeting and unanimously approved at that time. this is an important element of the general plan and guide the framework of the city's actions and response to and recovery from a disaster. it establishes policies and programs to protect san francisco from risks associated with natural and man-made disasters and in san francisco we know this is a particular concern because of seismic hazards and qearkt quakes. an updated element is before you for a number of reasons. the current element was adopted in noon 97 and we really learned about how other cities are dealing and preparing for
7:08 am
disasters. the document represent a cocollaboration of many city agencies and to develop plans and programs and further prepare for community reliancy and establish policies that guide the city's actions and to prepare for and recover from a major disaster. finally having an update the element of the city is well suited to receive funding for mitigation projects and recovery assistance. this update builds on the existing 1997 element with some notable additions. in addition to earthquakes it spans its focus about new information about hazards and medical merges and communication failures and terrorism and second incorporate new information on disaster preparedness and recovery and as the supervisor mentioned the community action plan for
7:09 am
seismic safety and these initiatives and finally this element expands its focus to look at response and recovery. we really learned a lot how other cities have dealt with the aftermath of hurricane that treena and the tsunami in japan and this deals with the response and the recoveree effects of a disaster. the element is organized into four categories. mitigation, response, recovery and construction and for each category there is an objective followed by associated policies and then the plent pleasant actions for this carried out through a number of city programs. this includes the hazard mitigation plan, the resilient initiative and recommendations developed through the caps initiative. i would be happy to answer specific questions about these policies or objectives. this is a major milestone and we look
7:10 am
forward to work with you and our other partner agencies to assure that the city is well positioned for this. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. mr. chairman, are there -- if there are no comments are all of you perhaps we could open it up to public comment. are there any public comment cards? if you would like to make a public comment come up to the podium. >> and three minutes maximum. >> sue hester, barbara stewart is going to follow up with specific comments as to this year and has been in the various papers. this is from the community services element, and this is a seismic hazard zone. if you notice a large part of
7:11 am
san francisco is in a hazard zone. it's hard to tell but in this case and this is a map, two pages later, of tsunami zones and basically around the edges of the city. what is missing in here is a factual analysis what happened in 1989. i didn't live through the 1986 earthquake -- 1906 earthquake but a lot of us lived through 89. there were deaths because of the majority of the city in the eastern part is on this type of fill and i will go back to the map on page 11. this is bay fill and there are large chunks of district six and mostly bay fill and large chunks of seven and three and two and some in supervisor's
7:12 am
wiener's district because the water went that far west and we do not have -- where is the area that the city has planned on increasing housing? they have an increase of housing in all of this area that is filled, and it was industrial area for a reason of low intensity but high intensity in an earthquake. we do not have -- you do not have adequate information in this eir to allow you to present a plan for a, zoning on bayville if the result of adalding a lot housing there is the upper end housing. how does this match the housing needs identified elsewhere in the plan? and they plan is --
7:13 am
pardon me, the practice is that where you have fill you go down to bed rock and you anchor on bed rock and that produces very high end -- [inaudible] (buzz) -- and we are asking to you stop and breathe a little bit. if you have to stop by spending this back to planning because the clock is running? so be it. the last time it was updated was 20 years ago and we will have enormous change in the climate the next ten years -- we don't have to wait 20 years and the planning department is using data that is out of date. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am barbara stewart. >> can you please pull the
7:14 am
microphone closer? thank you. >> i am here to talk about the dangers of flooding. as you know the coastal areas and the low lying areas around the bay are very vulnerable to flooding and -- there is rising tide and higher storm surges that threaten the city. but the current planning document relies on data that are obsolete in terms of predictive strengths. newer research has been done in the last five years and it's based on larger and more precise data sets so it's possible to predict with considerable confidence the amount of flooding that might occur even in smaller geographic areas. one of the studies was
7:15 am
discussed in the "san francisco chronicle" by david pearlman. it was called quality global's level rise could hit california hard". the second study was described in the "new york times" in its environment section on the front page that described data that indicated san francisco bay along the embarcadero may rise 3 feet in the next eight years. the findings of the two studies merit careful consideration of land use questions confronting san francisco. i have described these to the planning department and the port commission and the board of supervisors. approving such significant capital projects should be based on the best and most scientific data preparing against flooding will
7:16 am
be expensive, but it is important not to ignore the city's safety based on the most recent data that we have. thank you. >> thank you. is there any additional public comments? seeing none mr. chairman can we close public comment? >> yes. >> okay. public comment is closed. so mr. chairman i move that we forward this to the full board with a positive recommendation. this proposed community safety element went through a very, very lengthy thorough process and public vetting with public hearing and i think it's very, very strong and deserves our support. >> supervisor cohen. >>i wanted to ask a department to the planning department. one of the commenters spoke about the use of out of date data. could you repute that or agree
7:17 am
with it or do something with that statement. >> >> sary phillips with the planning department. one thing i want to note about this element or in any general plan element they're meant to provide a kind of the lay of the land image. one thing about our general plan most elements are to be in place for about 25 years so any math that is included in them by nature obsolete within a few years. we don't use maps to make land use decisions and i want to support the commenter's statement. it's important when we make decisions on up-to-date data and on sea level and debating and what is going on happen and in regard to flooding the city has a rate map and flood map that is adopted and regularly updated. this provides generally overview of where they are but land use is not based on these and i can
7:18 am
assure you these will not be up to dea. they're up-to-date now but they're not meant to be serve on the long-term or used in that way. >> are they used as a tool to assist your decision making progress? >> they are as many things, so the general plan has ten separate elements so whether all of these, whether it be community safety, housing, commerce, recreation and open space element -- any decision that we take should look at all of the issues that the plan contains. this specific plan does address specifically the areas that we see at most risk that was pointed out, where might we see tsunamis and all of these and we see that. but when we are making decisions and coding or planning code should be based on accurate maps.
7:19 am
this is gives an idea we should look out for this area and an area of risk but if we want to go into the specific risks like with treasury island look at the data at that point and time. >> thank you. >> i wanted to thank you for the presentations. i had a question from the -- or from the public testimony. i know that at the joint policy committee which is the a bag mtc and air district and that body we're looking at sea level rise analysis, and there are new methods looked at right now for large disaster events that will be coming more frequently in the future and i think they said once a month and in 40 years there will be something once a month and how it impacts to those areas and san francisco. are we in touch with a bag and the other
7:20 am
agencies to look at new methodologies so it helps to inform our safety element? >> absolutely. we get most of our information from them and one of the areas we're working closely with them, and i think this relates to ms. hester's point and land development and is our c/h- strategy and helps to determine where growth should and could happen and they're looking at in terms of growth and not just in san francisco but regionally we look at these risks. >> i think they're looking at sea level rise, climate change and strategy and how we plan better. okay. that is really helpful. thank you. >> thank you. any additional questions or comments? so i motion is on the floor mr. chairman.
7:21 am
>> so it's moved -- colleagues, can we accept this without objection? thank you. ms. miller, copy could you please call item three. >> item three is for production policy scpls disbloals this is an item that supervisor and campus has brought and since it's been called let me open it up for public comment. is anyone from the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none public comment is closed so colleague can we move this or continue to the call of the chair, -- i am trying to remember -- >> [inaudible] >> so we will continue this item without objection. thank you. mis miller, please call the last item. >> item four is for the planning code and the requirements for
7:22 am
the afforable housing program apply to ten units or more and nine units that didn't receive a first construction document. >> thank you and we were expecting two of the sponsors besides the mayor and supervisor wiener but president chiu and others were here planning give opening remarks. i am wonder figure we could wait until they arrive unless supervisor wiener wants to make some opening remarks. >> sure. thanks mr. chairman and perhaps we could hear from the mayor's office as well. this legislation is a result of the extensive broad base negotiations around the housing trust fund. the bulk of that proposal of course is on the ballot as a charter amendment, and there is -- or this is one of the items -- perhaps the
7:23 am
only one at this point but one of the items that has to be done legislatively so this legislation is companion legislation to the charter amendment. part of a negotiation, actually a key part of it, so i think it's a very worthy piece of legislation to support. >> thank you. maybe we could move to olson lee, the director of mayor and housing. >> good afternoon supervisors. as supervisor wiener presented this is about the housing trust fund. it's about the larger package of the charter amendment and is before the voters in november as well as both legislative changes that need to occur subject to the passage of the charter amendment as well as administrative changes that are
7:24 am
needed to implement the broad housing trust fund program, and the importance of the housing trust fund -- i think our other hearings have discussed. the various aspects of the housing trust fund, but just for the general public to repeat what the overall housing trust fund is about? it's about stimulating all sorts of residential development, specifically replacing the loss of redevelopment funding for afforable housing and in this process continuing the good work of the city on producing afforable housing for all types of populations that we have done over the past 20 years. dan adams of my staff will go into greater detail about this specific legislation, and again
7:25 am
how it is a crucial part of the larger housing trust fund. thank you very much. >> thank you mr. lee. so why don't we go to president david chu before the presentation by your staff. >> was supervisor cohen on the mic? >> i was but -- >> great. >> i can yield to you mr. president. >> thank you. first of allcology leagues i want to thank you for considering this legislation as i think you understand the context of this. this was a policy change that came out of the hard work of the working group and i want to thank them for not only the work they did on the measure we will be considering on the november ballot but as well as considering trailing legislation i think this is the first piece that this committee and our board will be considering. i know it wasn't easy for our housing advocates, and policy makers and developers to develop the consensus when needed when there was so much at stake and
7:26 am
i want to say that the unity the afforable housing community is behind this proposal. the legislation before you today and support by the mayor, myself and supervisor kim, who just joined us and amend the code for the incluary housing program from five to ten units and exempt five to nine from these requirements and i think one thing that is important for folks to understand was that five to nine units or added to the inclusionary program in 2006 and the thinking at the time was to further our city's goals and meet the afforable housing objectives. what we have seen since then, and i hope that we hear from city staff on this, we have seen a decline in application for this development, but we have seen hardly any development occur in this category in the five years since the policy was put into place, so the thinking during
7:27 am
the discussions around the afforable housing trust fund was to go back to what we had originally had as the city policy before 2006, and again i want to thank city staff working through this as well as the planning commission and planning staff for their consideration as well. i do want to mention they have a number of amendments they would like to propose to the legislation that we have in front of us based on conversations we had in the last couple of weeks. colleague i will circulate that to you in the next 30 seconds but to be brief about it. first of all we wanted to change the effective date of the legislation so that the board can in the future if we needed to reevaluate and potentially amend the program as it relates to this five to nine exemption, and secondly we also want to require that the planning department evaluate this exemption three years from now after it takes place, so that we can assess the impact
7:28 am
on our housing policies and whether we're effective at sustaining five to nine production in the context of meeting our other housing goals so i will be the amendments probably after public comment but i will circulate them shortly and thanks all the players and mayor's office and planning department and the stakeholders worked with the board. >> thank you supervisor. supervisor kim has joined us. >> thank you chair mar. actually the supervisor covered most of the points and i would emphasize this came out of extensive conversations with large-small developers, affordable housing rights and activists and the mayor's office and this is one of the trailing piece of legislation that is falling and in particular as we think about development in san francisco it's important to think how we balance
7:29 am
development between large and small developers, and small developers tend to be san francisco residentings, locally based and this is of course an area that we would like to encourage and support. i also think that we have seen over the last couple of years, which i think president chu said and there is nine items after the inclusionary unit was included for that, and we are hoping to see over the next few years with this amendment within three years how this amendment actually does incentivize that production and how it relates to the balance of development throughout san francisco, so i am happy to co-sponsor this today. it was mentioned the amendments that our office is already supportive of, particularly changing the effective date of the legislation to january 15 and i think that is important a


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on